GDT: Red Wings @ New Jersey Devils -7:00 EST- FS-D

jkutswings

hot piss hockey
Jul 10, 2014
10,851
8,576
Well, I wanted to trade Yzerman in '03, so take that!
I'm not saying that people should have welcomed a Datsyuk trade with open arms. 99 percent would've grabbed pitchforks if he was dealt. I'm saying that Detroit being where they are now isn't very surprising, based on the decisions made over the last 5-10 years. As others have mentioned, pending UFAs should've been dealt for assets, rather than overpaid to remain here and be largely irrelevant. Either Nyquist or Tatar should've been traded while they still had value. Et cetera, et cetera, dead horse beaten yet again...

There is still a crowd that preaches patience for the path the franchise is on. Based on the assets they have, and the contracts signed, and the overall approach for several years now...I don't see any reason to have any patience with the current regime, because I don't have any faith that they'll get it right. It's essentially Larkin and a collection of depth, spare parts, and rejects. I see guys like Cholo and Hronek and Rasmussen being more decent to good secondary players, but nobody that even rises to a regular first liner, let alone a guy to help really turn the corner. And the same record keeps playing.

So I really really hope Holland is done as general manager after this season. And they bring in somebody from outside the organization to replace him. Because this team has gotten extremely stale, both on the ice and in the front office. And no, there's no guarantee whatsoever that a new GM will do even a decent job. But being afraid of change is a great way to ensure mediocrity, so I want them to do their homework like never before, and find a talented and creative mind to oversee the next chapter in Red Wings history.
 

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,017
11,677
Call it playoff fodder if you want, I wonder if Tampa fans felt the same when they were pushed to 7 games and narrowly got that win despite (or because?) we lost Glendening and Kronwall.
I mean, they made it to the finals that year, so I would think they don't care at all about us and care more about the fact they were so close but didn't make it. In the end we lost, and we lost in a more lopsided series to the same team the next season. We went nowhere, and the team was not getting any better.

In the history books, there will be a 25 year playoff streak. Then a few or some years outside the playoffs to start turning things around. Like it or not, no one will say "oh they were so mismanaged for making the playoffs 25 years, they should have started a rebuild much sooner" except that old guy in the back of the bar drowning himself in whiskey as he talks about how HE knew, he knew that the team would decline when their star players got old, he knew they were gonna get bad eventually.. if only they had listened to him, they could have become bad much sooner!
1. The 25 year streak is a trivia tidbit. Other than that it really doesn't make much of a difference except for what the team did during that streak. The four cups and many years of deep playoff runs are what matter during that streak. Do you think if the streak ended at 23 years that it would severely impact your memories as a Wings fan?

2. I think you are severely underselling the amount of Wings fans who do not believe the tail-end of the streak was managed properly. The constant demeaning characterization of those who believe Holland to have lost his touch is quite old and does not help your point (considering nobody has argued the entire streak was mismanaged).

If this team makes any impact in the playoffs within 6-7 years they're ahead of the curve as far as most rebuilds go.

This would depend on your definition of "impact". I would not consider anything less than a 6-7 game second round loss to be an impact, and even then I think that is a low bar to set. Not to mention, when the end goal is building a roster to contend and win a Stanley Cup, the specific results leading up to that are somewhat secondary.
 

Winger98

Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
22,756
4,569
Cleveland
They look to be bad real bad for probably the next two or three years. Good news most of the problematic contracts are ready to graduate as they are spiking back up. It sure isn't ideal, but they can do the rebuild now. They need to stay completely out of free agency this summer though. Seriously don't care who is out there, sign our younger guys and get crunched again next year.

I still think this team has more talent on the roster than we're seeing in the nightly results, and I wouldn't be so willing to chalk up top5 picks for the next few years. Even with how awful this team has been for the past month we're still one win from crawling out of the bottom 5 this year. And I really doubt Holland stays out of the free agent market.

Also, incompetently spending $78 million isn't a rebuild. It's just being incompetent. If your purpose is rebuilding, you're maximizing your current assets to stock up the future, it's putting together an organizing with some financial flexibility for the same purpose. Holland didn't strike when the iron was hot on the majority of his current assets, though, and has since handed out a bunch of bad contracts. We might be able to rebuild just because Holland will continue to incompetently spend $6 million over the cap, but I wouldn't bet on it. And I wouldn't expect him to not keep dipping into free agency for as much talent as he can. That's his actual goal, and unless that changes this isn't a rebuild, it's just dumb, blind chance.

They obviously can’t move it all in one off season. No rebuild can be done in one off season. There’s also a cap floor they have to consider. They’ll move these contract over the course of the next three or four seasons. You guys are freaking out over nothing.

You have quite the liberal definition of "freaking out."

No rebuild can be done in a season, but if we're looking at doing a purposeful rebuild, part of that is not weighing the team down with a bunch of bad deals, and moving to cut the fat on those that we do have. If we're worried about the floor, we shouldn't be. We could lose Gator, Helm, Nielsen, and Daley and replace them with nothing - literally nothing - and still be above the floor right now. The problem is that those are deals that are essentially unmovable unless we're packing better assets with them, which I think would be an even worse move at this point.

With everything Holland says and does what leads you to believe that their will be any players moved in the next few years and that Holland won't go into every off-season looking to buy? If he signed guys to one year deals and looked to move them later, or if he didn't offer new contracts to guys before reluctantly moving them, etc., I could see having faith in Holland embracing a rebuild a bit.

As it is, I think it's more likely Holland's spending will start getting some better results before it allows the club to rebuild. And that Holland will embrace those results.
 

chris05

Registered User
May 23, 2013
138
5
hard to win games when you can't put the puck in the net. kenny and jefrey are getting a first hand look at what minimum wage players look like. Z gets a pass. 16-20 minute night players that can't produce and you wonder why you are losing every night. Booth has 3 goals Larkin has 5. The future looks bright. I doubt anybody on this wing team can compete harder than booth.
 

Pavels Dog

Registered User
Feb 18, 2013
19,736
14,704
Sweden
1. The 25 year streak is a trivia tidbit. Other than that it really doesn't make much of a difference except for what the team did during that streak. The four cups and many years of deep playoff runs are what matter during that streak. Do you think if the streak ended at 23 years that it would severely impact your memories as a Wings fan?
It's a trivia tidbit that's going to be mentioned a hell of a lot more than the trivia tidbit of "The Wings weren't really all that great in the playoffs the last couple of years of the streak". If the streak ended at 23 it would be a less impressive streak and there would be a much bigger stain on Holland's and Babcock's resumes as they would have missed the playoffs with a team capable of finishing with 100+ points with stars like Datsyuk and Zetterberg still playing at a high level. The trivia tidbit would probably be something like

"-Wings had a very impressive 23 year streak in the playoffs Joe!"
"-That's right Billy, one only wonders how long they could have gone on if Ken Holland hadn't decided to deliberately tank the team, a decision that made him hated by fans and caused him to be fired."

Thinking this rebuild should have only started when we missed the playoffs is why this rebuild will take years longer than it should.
I've been waiting years for examples of one team that has torn it down while in a playoff position to kickstart a rebuild. Still haven't gotten an answer. "Normal" rebuilds do take many years, the kind that isn't a scorched earth approach that usually comes only after many, many years of failure. Since 2013 we haven't traded away a 1st. That was the start of the shift towards the future. In 2015 we were a 100 point team. That was the last time he bought at the TDL. Wrong? In hindsight, perhaps. Did it add years to our rebuild? Not likely. 2016 was garbage, sure. But in rebuilding terms, what should Holland have done? Sold assets while we were in a playoff position? Played more veterans (Larkin and Mrazek carried that team to the playoffs)?

Holland could have avoided a few veteran contracts but does anyone really think Abdelkader or Helm is the reason the team hasn't been getting top 10 picks for years? Is the team 5-10 million in cap space away from having the means to quickly turn the franchise around? Is Abdelkader's good play the reason we're only headed for a bottom 3 finish and not bottom 2? Was his terrible play last season the reason we had bad luck with the draft lottery?

Can't wait until we have a good core again so we can start thinking about when that core should be dismantled so we can rebuild. A 100-110 point team that makes the 2nd round seems to be time to burn things down, as long as there's some kind of downward trend to be found.

16-20 minute night players that can't produce and you wonder why you are losing every night. Booth has 3 goals Larkin has 5. The future looks bright.
Larkin also has more assists this year than Booth has in his last 4 NHL seasons combined.

And he's the only forward in the NHL that has 30+ points and a sub-6% sh%.
6 Forwards have 30+ points and <10.0 sh%. Voracek, Kane, Panarin, Wheeler, Tarasenko. And Larkin.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Primetime8

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,017
11,677
It's a trivia tidbit that's going to be mentioned a hell of a lot more than the trivia tidbit of "The Wings weren't really all that great in the playoffs the last couple of years of the streak". If the streak ended at 23 it would be a less impressive streak and there would be a much bigger stain on Holland's and Babcock's resumes as they would have missed the playoffs with a team capable of finishing with 100+ points with stars like Datsyuk and Zetterberg still playing at a high level. The trivia tidbit would probably be something like

"-Wings had a very impressive 23 year streak in the playoffs Joe!"
"-That's right Billy, one only wonders how long they could have gone on if Ken Holland hadn't decided to deliberately tank the team, a decision that made him hated by fans and caused him to be fired."
For starters, it being mentioned more than the Wings missing the playoffs for a couple of years doesn't make it worth pursuing. The cups are what makes a team's legacy (if you want to be a team worth remembering as one of the greats). The streak is such a secondary concept but considering it is the only accomplishment the Wings have since 2009 that is what is being used as the narrative behind defending Holland's moves.

As far as the conversation you just made up to make your point: It's a made up conversation you made to make your point. Though I did like the part where once again you attribute every form of rebuilding with "tank", because that makes your position come across as more reasonable.
 

Heaton

Moderator
Feb 13, 2004
22,548
925
Auburn Hills
I've been waiting years for examples of one team that has torn it down while in a playoff position to kickstart a rebuild.

Not exactly a good question to ask when GM's constantly make mistakes and errors. Just because a GM hasn't done it, doesn't mean it wasn't the right thing to do. Plenty of fans on this board thought it was time to start re-tooling earlier than when we did. Instead of re-signing Cleary year after year, instead of neglecting drafting defensemen, instead of neglecting using trades as a trade route. Instead of trading back in drafts and refusing to trade up. Instead of waiving players in favor of veterans when it was painfully obvious that this team needed to take steps to get younger and re-stock the cupboard.

I don't understand why you're pretending like this team has been a contender the last few playoff years, which forced Holland's hand to not be proactive. Nothing Holland does is proactive. When Lidstrom retired, it was over, we had nothing to win with. Kronwall was fine, but our defense wasn't good.

If you want to buy into the idea that rebuilds take 10 years, go ahead. But while you're correct that teams like Toronto were able to build with guys like Marner, Kadri etc... for years before they got Matthews, they also had really bad management that caused the rebuild to take longer than it needed, as shown by having to do a scorched earth approach and fire the entire management team. Owners that show too much loyalty usually end up like most Detroit teams, where they're stuck in mediocrity for years past what's necessary. The fact remains that currently, this Wings team doesn't have much to show for the past few years of trending down. In this era of NHL, top prospects don't stay out of the NHL for 5-7 years anymore, they're expected to come in and produce at a high level sooner than ever.

Holland maxing out the cap this year and last year is hurting this team. Abdelkader and Helm are not keeping this team from getting high picks, but Helm, Abdelkader, Nielsen, Daley etc... collectively are. Holland is causing this team to rebuild for 10 years, he's a self fulfilling prophecy because he has no clue what he's doing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jkutswings

jkutswings

hot piss hockey
Jul 10, 2014
10,851
8,576
And the fact that, instead of 1-2 colossal blunders, it's 100 lesser mistakes that collectively hamstring the franchise, doesn't make it any less difficult to fix.
 

Pavels Dog

Registered User
Feb 18, 2013
19,736
14,704
Sweden
For starters, it being mentioned more than the Wings missing the playoffs for a couple of years doesn't make it worth pursuing. The cups are what makes a team's legacy (if you want to be a team worth remembering as one of the greats). The streak is such a secondary concept but considering it is the only accomplishment the Wings have since 2009 that is what is being used as the narrative behind defending Holland's moves.

As far as the conversation you just made up to make your point: It's a made up conversation you made to make your point. Though I did like the part where once again you attribute every form of rebuilding with "tank", because that makes your position come across as more reasonable.
Pursuing a streak just for the sake of the streak isn't what we were doing at all. If that was the case, Holland could have traded a lot more picks and prospects. He essentially left the team to sink or swim in 12-13 (only made playoffs due to a magic run to finish the season with Z, Dats, Kronwall and Howard BEASTING), in 13-14 (only made the playoffs due to Nyquist being a superstar, minor trade for Legwand that matters little big picture), in 15-16 (no attempts to improve team despite struggling all year), in 16-17 (no attempts to improve team, sold at deadline). Where's all the big moves done to preserve the streak? Signing veterans? The opposite of that is... not using our money, which is... the word I'm looking for is making something sink deliberately.
It's not really Holland's fault (well partially it is) that Z/Dats were the kind of superstars that brought it every season and that Babcock could coach a paper bag into the playoffs. Should he have fired Babcock for getting too much out of Nyquist/Tatar/Sheahan/Jurco/Dekeyser/Mrazek? If he didn't find Howard maybe we'd have a garbage season or two because of goaltending after 09 and we'd have some top 10 picks in their prime right now. It's ALMOST as if being really good for a really long time eventually catches up to you. Instead of 25 years in the playoff we could have had 18-19 and right around now we'd be exiting a 7-8 year period of up-and-down play a bit similar to Boston. Sh** didn't happen. We were too good, too consistent.

I'm trying to stay away from the "T"-word, but you're way off on me thinking every form of rebuilding is attritbutable with that word. On the contrary I think Holland has done a lot of rebuilding, but he doesn't seem to credit for it unless that rebuilding comes in something extremely similar to the form of rebuilding that is generally known as that dreadful T-word. Even now, a team selling at the TDL and drafting top 10, doesn't seem to earn him credit for rebuilding. Because we have some veteran contracts.
The fact remains that currently, this Wings team doesn't have much to show for the past few years of trending down.
Because fans have no patience. Larkin and Mantha are out top 2 point getters this year. They are our 2013 and 14 1st rounders, essentially the first signs of rebuilding. Svech isn't looking great but still has time. Rasmussen was drafted a few months ago, our first top 10 in decades. Cholo is projecting fine, as are Hronek and Saarijarvi who will be the start of the defensive rebuild, maybe along with our 18 1st. And we have many other d prospects in the system now. Too late? Perhaps, but it's coming. Nothing to show for it... only because fans don't allow the rebuild the time it actually takes. When we draft top 2-3 (when, not if), those prospects will step in almost immediately. And they could step in at the same time as kids that are now developing.
 
Last edited:

Lazlo Hollyfeld

The jersey ad still sucks
Mar 4, 2004
28,161
26,454
Thinking back on the game, it's sad how few legitimate scoring chances they had. The one goal was on a weak wrister from Abby that Schneider should have stopped.

It was a lot of single player efforts and not a lot of playmaking as a team.

Helms and Green's sloppiness in particular are symptoms of a team that is not mentally engaged. You don't make those mistakes when you're focused on details, focused on winning, and know there will be repercussions for lackadaisical play.
 

Red Stanley

Registered User
Apr 25, 2015
2,414
778
USA
For starters, it being mentioned more than the Wings missing the playoffs for a couple of years doesn't make it worth pursuing. The cups are what makes a team's legacy (if you want to be a team worth remembering as one of the greats). The streak is such a secondary concept but considering it is the only accomplishment the Wings have since 2009 that is what is being used as the narrative behind defending Holland's moves.

As far as the conversation you just made up to make your point: It's a made up conversation you made to make your point. Though I did like the part where once again you attribute every form of rebuilding with "tank", because that makes your position come across as more reasonable.

I disagree with you, but neither one of us as fans gets to determine what's worth pursuing or isn't. You also don't get to determine what parts of sports legacy other people value more or less. The streak is used as an example of a reason why things went the way they did as others would argue there was no reason other than incompetence. No matter how much you try to devalue it as a reason you'll never render it unreasonable because not everyone agrees with your personal point of view.
 

Heaton

Moderator
Feb 13, 2004
22,548
925
Auburn Hills
Because fans have no patience.

Nah, this is a weak take. Take a look around the league, teams aren't waiting 5-7 years for their really good prospects to make an impact. It's a young mans game now, when the prospect is good, they're making an impact sooner than ever. Larkin and Mantha look fine, Larkin is trending in the right direction to be a really good two-way player.

Fans have definitely been patient, most fans have been waiting for 4 years for the rebuild to really take shape. Now it's overripe and spoiling.

Again, thinking a rebuild HAS to take 10 years is flat out wrong. I'll keep repeating myself, the 10 year rebuilds happen when bad management screws stuff up for the first 6 or 7.

Either way, this team is in a good spot to get the picks we need now that the team is really bad. We need to keep losing and continue getting high draft picks.
 

Zetterberg4Captain

Registered User
Aug 11, 2009
13,728
2,136
Detroit
So if we're saying wings fans aren't patient than i guess this same posters are being patient with Edmonton, Arizona, Florida, etc

Whether it' four drafts removed or six who cares, you DO NOT get to be the one to pick four as the cutoff just to suit your arguement

I better not ever see those same posters saying, look at Edmonton or Arizona do you wanna be them. They should just be "patient"

We have been rebuilding on the fly for seven years, not 11 months.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jkutswings

Frk It

Mo Seider Less Problems
Jul 27, 2010
36,201
14,683
Look it what have been great if we had started re-building 4 years ago, but we didn't. And I understand why we didn't, even if I disagree with why we didn't. We traded for Zidlicky and Cole at the 2015 TDL. Team was clearly not re-building at that point in time.

We are in maybe year 2 of the re-build... at best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fire Ken Holland

Zetterberg4Captain

Registered User
Aug 11, 2009
13,728
2,136
Detroit
Look it what have been great if we had started re-building 4 years ago, but we didn't. And I understand why we didn't, even if I disagree with why we didn't. We traded for Zidlicky and Cole at the 2015 TDL. Team was clearly not re-building at that point in time.

We are in maybe year 2 of the re-build... at best.

Holland said we were rebuilding on the fly longer than 20 months ago.

The process did not start last march exclusively
 

Frk It

Mo Seider Less Problems
Jul 27, 2010
36,201
14,683
Holland said we were rebuilding on the fly longer than 20 months ago.

The process did not start last march exclusively

I know that "re-building on the fly" has the word re-build in it, but I think that was a PR move and not any kind of an honest re-build effort. Have to believe that was just a ploy to push off an actual re-build for as long as possible and ride the playoff streak out so they could keep making money.
 

jkutswings

hot piss hockey
Jul 10, 2014
10,851
8,576
Pursuing a streak just for the sake of the streak isn't what we were doing at all. If that was the case, Holland could have traded a lot more picks and prospects. He essentially left the team to sink or swim in 12-13 (only made playoffs due to a magic run to finish the season with Z, Dats, Kronwall and Howard BEASTING), in 13-14 (only made the playoffs due to Nyquist being a superstar, minor trade for Legwand that matters little big picture), in 15-16 (no attempts to improve team despite struggling all year), in 16-17 (no attempts to improve team, sold at deadline). Where's all the big moves done to preserve the streak? Signing veterans? The opposite of that is... not using our money, which is... the word I'm looking for is making something sink deliberately.
It's not really Holland's fault (well partially it is) that Z/Dats were the kind of superstars that brought it every season and that Babcock could coach a paper bag into the playoffs. Should he have fired Babcock for getting too much out of Nyquist/Tatar/Sheahan/Jurco/Dekeyser/Mrazek? If he didn't find Howard maybe we'd have a garbage season or two because of goaltending after 09 and we'd have some top 10 picks in their prime right now. It's ALMOST as if being really good for a really long time eventually catches up to you. Instead of 25 years in the playoff we could have had 18-19 and right around now we'd be exiting a 7-8 year period of up-and-down play a bit similar to Boston. Sh** didn't happen. We were too good, too consistent.

I'm trying to stay away from the "T"-word, but you're way off on me thinking every form of rebuilding is attritbutable with that word. On the contrary I think Holland has done a lot of rebuilding, but he doesn't seem to credit for it unless that rebuilding comes in something extremely similar to the form of rebuilding that is generally known as that dreadful T-word. Even now, a team selling at the TDL and drafting top 10, doesn't seem to earn him credit for rebuilding. Because we have some veteran contracts.

Because fans have no patience. Larkin and Mantha are out top 2 point getters this year. They are our 2013 and 14 1st rounders, essentially the first signs of rebuilding. Svech isn't looking great but still has time. Rasmussen was drafted a few months ago, our first top 10 in decades. Cholo is projecting fine, as are Hronek and Saarijarvi who will be the start of the defensive rebuild, maybe along with our 18 1st. And we have many other d prospects in the system now. Too late? Perhaps, but it's coming. Nothing to show for it... only because fans don't allow the rebuild the time it actually takes. When we draft top 2-3 (when, not if), those prospects will step in almost immediately. And they could step in at the same time as kids that are now developing.
Because fans have no patience?!? Your entire post just outlined exactly how patience got them where they are right now!

I understand saying that a kneejerk reaction isn't the way to go. That burning it to the ground as soon as you're no longer a Cup favorite is silly. But half a decade of letting the team atrophy isn't exactly being hasty.

And just as importantly, let's not pretend that the previous run of success was built on being patient. When Detroit was at their best, they were doing things like:
* Making it rain in free agency like it was Christmas in July
* Swinging trades left and right
* Matching RFA offers on premier players (Fedorov)

Kinda the opposite of being patient.

Now yes, the salary cap changed a TON of things, from free agency to recapture to LTIR. But I'd argue that, when evaluating the (large) portion of Holland's career where he was so successful, he (and the rest of the front office) were toward the aggressive end of the spectrum. So what's wrong with thinking an approach at least somewhat more aggressive than the current one makes more sense?
 

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,017
11,677
I disagree with you, but neither one of us as fans gets to determine what's worth pursuing or isn't. You also don't get to determine what parts of sports legacy other people value more or less. The streak is used as an example of a reason why things went the way they did as others would argue there was no reason other than incompetence. No matter how much you try to devalue it as a reason you'll never render it unreasonable because not everyone agrees with your personal point of view.
I think that if you are a fan that puts a playoff streak over the pursuit of the Stanley Cup, then we are going to have a fundamental difference in opinion as to why the game is played in the first place, and there is no conversation to be had there.

The streak is secondary. I guarantee you those who think the streak has enough value to pursue over the pursuit of a Stanley Cup (which you are essentially arguing when you assert the team was right in keeping the streak alive even if it meant prolonging the rebuild back to a cup contender) is in a very small minority on these boards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jkutswings

dragonballgtz

Registered User
Jul 30, 2014
1,883
847
So getting back on topic....this was a bad game. Turnovers leading straight to goals from the all important vets on the team lol
 

Red Stanley

Registered User
Apr 25, 2015
2,414
778
USA
I think that if you are a fan that puts a playoff streak over the pursuit of the Stanley Cup, then we are going to have a fundamental difference in opinion as to why the game is played in the first place, and there is no conversation to be had there.

The streak is secondary. I guarantee you those who think the streak has enough value to pursue over the pursuit of a Stanley Cup (which you are essentially arguing when you assert the team was right in keeping the streak alive even if it meant prolonging the rebuild back to a cup contender) is in a very small minority on these boards.

Unless you can prove that by extending the streak by a few years they missed out on a championship a few years down the road, your claim is nothing more than supposition. It's also not what I argued at all. One can't dismiss a factual reason using their personal opinion of it as evidence. The end.
 

Dotter

THE ATHLETIC IS GARBAGE
Jul 2, 2014
8,439
2,880
Imprisonment, TN
goo.gl
Not exactly a good question to ask when GM's constantly make mistakes and errors. Just because a GM hasn't done it, doesn't mean it wasn't the right thing to do. Plenty of fans on this board thought it was time to start re-tooling earlier than when we did.

The fact that no team has done it should prove to you and everyone else that making the decision to go for a full on rebuild is likely a round-table group decision, and it's not an easy decision. There's more than just waking up one morning and saying, "Beautiful sunny morning, my pancakes were tasty... today I'm going to pull the plug and start a 10 year rebuild"

In fact, no team in the NHL probably had an easier decision whether a rebuild was right or not than the Detroit Red Wings. Mike Iltich was dying, no way they are going to pull the plug when he had a short time of life left. No freaking way! And they had a brand new state-of-the-art billion dollar arena in the works.

For you and many others it is easy to sit in your lazy-e-boy and click the buttons on your TV remote and say "I been saying they needed a rebuild since 2010". It costs you nothing. It's nothing more than a nuisance to you; it's an inconvenience for you. Nothing more.

For Mike Ilitch, it was his living and breathing beloved child. It's what he chose to spend his millions on. It was his life. It was his legacy. Mike Ilitch will go down in time as arguably one of the best NHL owners.

But it would have been more convenient for you had they started the rebuild just a few years earlier...
 
Last edited:

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,017
11,677
Unless you can prove that by extending the streak by a few years they missed out on a championship a few years down the road, your claim is nothing more than supposition. It's also not what I argued at all. One can't dismiss a factual reason using their personal opinion of it as evidence. The end.
I am saying it prolongs the time between winning championships and is secondary to the end goal, so it really shouldn't be so high on people's priorities.

Maybe you could explain what makes the streak so important that the rebuild should have been prolonged? Or argue that the rebuild started earlier and the streak being prolonged has no effect on the length of the rebuild (though it seems most people acknowledge the start of the rebuild as last season when the streak ended).

For Mike Ilitch, it was his living and breathing beloved child. It's what he chose to spend his millions on. It was his life. It was his legacy. Mike Ilitch will go down in time as arguably one of the best NHL owners.

Good for him? Just because the Wings are his passion does not make him right and above criticism.
 

Winger98

Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
22,756
4,569
Cleveland
I doubt Ilitch's health had any say in what Holland was doing. It certainly didn't on the baseball side, and Ilitch seemed to be far more personally invested in the Tigers than the Wings over the last ten years.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->